HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-21-2014 PH2 PottratzGoodwin, Heather
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
10/21/14 PH2
Begin forwarded message:
Mejia, Anthony
Monday, October 20, 2014 9:41 PM
Kremke, Kate
Goodwin, Heather
Fwd: Airport related
From: Richard Pottratz <pottratzgsbcg�lobal.net>
Date: October 20, 2014 at 9:28:39 PM PDT
To: Richard Pottratz <pottratzgsbcglobal.net>
Subject: Airport related
Forwarded FYI.
From: Richard Pottratz [ mailto:pottratz(dsbcglobal.net]
Sent: Monday, October 20, 2014 11:12 AM
To: ']an Marx'
Subject: Airport related
Dear Mayor Jan:
COUNCIL MEETING: ( o/Z'���
ITEM NO.:_,__ ! Z
RECEJ`,/I~n__
OCT 2 1 1.014
SL-0 UTY
After reading the Sunday Trib editorial opinion regarding the disagreement the city has with the
Airport Land Use Plan (ALUP) and the Airport Land Use Commission's (ALUC) finding
regarding the city's land use plan, I offer the following in response to the Trib article, based on
my time as an Airport Land Use Commissioner. (I served until 2009.) Feel free to share these
comments with the members of your council.
Current ALUP identical to one adopted in 1977? The original ALUP was adopted in
1973 and amended in 1974 and 1977. This was a document containing a few dozen
pages. The ALUC made major modifications to the 1977 plan and published the 2002
amendment which increased the document size to about 100 pages. (I spent many, many
hours on that amendment!) Some minor amendments were made in 2004. The
amendment now in work appears to be a couple hundred pages. I don't know if more
pages are better.:) So, if staff is advising that the ALUP has not been updated for 37
years (as stated in the Trib) they have not done their homework!
2. The airport area is the logical place for residential development? Planners say the only
other choice is hillsides, agricultural land, and open space? Agricultural land is where
almost all approved large scale development has or will occur! Orcut area, Margarita,
and Dalidio are /were ag land. (In my opinion, high density housing is a poor idea in all
of these areas; industrial development is the desirable use of land in the airport area —
residential use should be secondary and must be allowed with caution.)
3. The city's long term development plan is scheduled for adoption Tuesday night? I'm
sure the city has given the ALUC the required 45 day notification of intent to override
their findings of inconsistency with the ALUP and also described to them why the city
plan really is consistent with the ALUP. (I wish the Trib had included the ALUC
response to that notification.) If my memory is correct, the override will likely make the
city liable for damages that might occur as a result of the override action.
4. The council will create an airport overlay zone that will comply with the State
Aeronautics Act? The ALUP already complies! The California Airport Land Use
Planning Handbook is the document used for guidance by the ALUC and also, I
presume, by the airport planning consultant. The key word is guidance. For the
consultant to state that the existing safety zones are larger than necessary is an opinion,
not a fact. The ALUC members were chosen because of their `expertise in aviation' and
are, perhaps, more conservative in regard to safety than the consultant hired by the
city. (Consultants frequently provide the answers that are desired; had a consultant been
hired by the ALUC the recommendation would likely have been in agreement with what
the ALUC was trying to substantiate. There is very little `black and white' in regard to
what is `necessary' in regard to safety zones.)
The decisions made in this regard, at tomorrow night's meeting, will likely not effect you or me
but will have an effect on the long term viability of the airport, which in my opinion is an
extremely valuable resource and must be protected. It is no secret that poor airport area planning
causes the demise of airports. (16 -18 airports close every year in California.) Santa Monica
airport is now under tremendous pressure (noise and pollution) and airports across the country
are struggling with noise complaints: Van Nuys, Philadelphia, John Wayne, San Diego, Dallas
FW, Tampa and O'Hare which recently opened a couple of new runways are examples. The
ALUC is trying to plan wisely so our airport is never on a future closure list!
When the Margarita area development was under consideration three of us on the ALUC met
with city representatives and negotiated an agreement — neither side `won'. The Margarita area
has its own section in the ALUP as a result of that agreement. I encourage your council to
withhold overriding the ALUC finding and instead make a greater effort to come to an
agreement with the ALUC. Good luck!
Dick